PDA

View Full Version : Hundreds of U.S. towns and cities have scrapped their recycling programs




Anti Federalist
03-18-2019, 07:53 PM
Good...maybe that foolishness can finally go away.

I do not participate, I pay a premium for co-mingled trash disposal.

I will not grub around in garbage like a rabid raccoon to fish out worthless "recyclables".

Now, maybe some of the asshole "Virtue Signaling", "Woke AF" corporate clowns, like United for instance, will stop mentally masturbating themselves into thinking recycling a couple of bags of plastic cups and cans makes a fiddler's fart worth of a difference after just having burned 10 fucking tons of kerosene in the stratosphere.


U.S. Cities Scrap Recycling Programs Due to High Costs

https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/03/16/u-s-cities-scrap-recycling-programs-due-to-high-costs/

16 Mar 2019

Hundreds of U.S. towns and cities have scrapped their recycling programs because the costs to maintain them have skyrocketed.

Municipalities across the country have either eliminated their recycling programs, put strict limits on the type of material they accept, or agreed to raise their prices to try and make ends meet after China stopped buying some recyclable materials like used plastic and paper, the New York Times reported.

Some cities, like Philadelphia, are using incinerators to burn residents’ recycled material in the hopes that the material could be used for energy. But other cities have resorted to throwing its recyclables in the trash or suspending its recycling programs altogether.

Memphis still has recycling bins placed around the city, but not every item placed in the bin is recycled. Cans, bottles, and newspapers are sent to landfills instead of recycling facilities.

Officials in Deltona, Florida, decided to scrap the city’s recycling program in February after they realized their program was not cost-effective.

“We are in a crisis moment in the recycling movement right now,” Fiona Ma, who serves as the treasurer of California, told the Times.

America’s recycling crisis began after Chinese officials decided in January 2018 to restrict imported recyclable materials, including mixed paper and most plastic items.

Because fewer countries are buying recycled material, big recycling companies are trying to make up for profit losses by charging cities exorbitant rates to use their services.

The big recycling companies like Waste Management and Republic Services— both companies which double as landfill operators and trash collectors— have benefited financially from China’s restrictions.

Waste Management announced increased profits in 2018, and revenue for Republic Services increased four percent throughout 2018.

But as the big recycling firms continue to make money, the cities and towns that use their services are struggling to keep up with the price increases.

Deltona city officials say the recycling company they used required them to pay an extra $25,000 per month to keep using the company’s services, and there would be no guarantee the old paper and plastic would be turned into new material.

“We all did recycling because it was easy, but the reality is that not much was actually being recycled,” Deltona Mayor Heidi Herzberg said.

Zippyjuan
03-18-2019, 07:55 PM
Willing to donate land to create more landfills?

specsaregood
03-18-2019, 08:07 PM
Recycling, Caribbean island style.

http://i.imgur.com/17Pv9kh.jpg

juleswin
03-18-2019, 08:14 PM
Meatless mondays, scrapping recycling programs, more and more signs of economic decline.

Anti Federalist
03-19-2019, 06:34 AM
Willing to donate land to create more landfills?

No...I pay for land to dump my trash.

Your house for sale?

Tell me, how is it in any way "green" to haul worthless recycled trash around, ship it around the world, burning tons of fuel in the process, only to be left with a product no one wants, is not economically viable and used more energy to process and ship than it would have to just create it from raw materials in the first place?

Superfluous Man
03-19-2019, 07:25 AM
Willing to donate land to create more landfills?

It's not like there's some shortage of land for landfills. It's probably a more economical method of waste disposal than recycling is.

ILUVRP
03-19-2019, 07:33 AM
i pay extra every month but never use it .

Brian4Liberty
03-19-2019, 11:30 AM
Memphis still has recycling bins placed around the city, but not every item placed in the bin is recycled. Cans, bottles, and newspapers are sent to landfills instead of recycling facilities.

I can’t imagine that mining and processing metals is less expensive than just tapping into the rich vein of already refined product in used cans. Take the cans to the refiner and throw them right back into the raw material processing. Seems like it would be simple for metals.

Plastics and glass? Not sure. Oil and sand are pretty easy to obtain in their raw form.

No doubt the real problem here is a government mandated program, using government funds, to pay a very limited number of recycling companies that essentially have a monopoly. Add to that a very labor intensive process of picking through garbage and separating it.

oyarde
03-19-2019, 02:26 PM
I accept lead , silver , gold , aluminum , platinum , palladium , bronze , brass and rhodium .

Schifference
03-19-2019, 02:42 PM
I accept lead , silver , gold , aluminum , platinum , palladium , bronze , brass and rhodium .

No copper?

shakey1
03-19-2019, 02:50 PM
https://iscrapapp.com/yards/us-nebraska-fremont-all-metals-market/pricing/

oyarde
03-19-2019, 03:00 PM
No copper?

Ya , I take it too

RJB
03-19-2019, 03:06 PM
In a few hundred years after things have decomposed and compressed, they will mine our landfills.

Stratovarious
03-19-2019, 03:14 PM
Expense is probably of lesser importance to the incredible waste of good materials used to
chase the 'trash' and try to make it back into something useable.
There is probably a greater negative footprint left in the effort to give liberals that
warm fuzzy feeling for wearing the green badge of honor.

Don't get me wrong, I use the sht out of items that seem useable even though they
can just be thrown away, after consuming whatever came in them,
but that just takes common sense and a commitment to do what we can in our own lives.
Besides doing what I already have been doing for many years, I just bought those
Walmart reusable bags a few weeks ago, they actually work out a hell of a lot
better for me in hindsight, than the plastic bags.
What I will always refuse though is the 'self checkout' those are massive job killers,
nothing green about putting people out of work.

Grandmastersexsay
03-19-2019, 03:35 PM
Any pro recycling people on this board, or people who are on the fence, should watch this Penn and Teller Bullshit episode:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/j0Hd6UfA4MKo/

oyarde
03-19-2019, 04:07 PM
No copper?

I also accept some cash for preferred customers . Each year I announce a guaranteed interest rate on new money for approved customers. This year was two percent .

Anti Federalist
03-20-2019, 12:01 AM
I can’t imagine that mining and processing metals is less expensive than just tapping into the rich vein of already refined product in used cans. Take the cans to the refiner and throw them right back into the raw material processing. Seems like it would be simple for metals.

Plastics and glass? Not sure. Oil and sand are pretty easy to obtain in their raw form.

No doubt the real problem here is a government mandated program, using government funds, to pay a very limited number of recycling companies that essentially have a monopoly. Add to that a very labor intensive process of picking through garbage and separating it.

Steel, aluminum and glass, those are the only net energy savers.

IF, and this is mighty big if, IF you use them on site, or in close proximity to where the final product is being made.

But once you truck it to a facility, process it, truck it again to a port, ship it on a massive ship to other side of the world, handle it and truck it again to a process facility, THEN truck it and handle it yet again as a finished product, back to the port, back around the world again, and handle it and truck it yet again, by now any gain is long gone.

Schifference
03-20-2019, 04:03 AM
Since this is such a worthwhile program, the government should consider taxing bottles, cans, styrofoam, drinking straws to name a few. Plastic which is made from petroleum is a great source of fuel and when burned at the proper temperature emits no harmful gasses. I do not drink anything that comes from a bottle or can. I purchase very little processed food. I think glass is great and can be reused. Garbage can be mostly non-existent if people managed it properly. Feed food scraps to animals, compost, scrap, reuse, burn. One problem is people do not know how to cook unless it comes prepackaged.

Brian4Liberty
03-20-2019, 09:57 AM
Steel, aluminum and glass, those are the only net energy savers.

IF, and this is mighty big if, IF you use them on site, or in close proximity to where the final product is being made.

But once you truck it to a facility, process it, truck it again to a port, ship it on a massive ship to other side of the world, handle it and truck it again to a process facility, THEN truck it and handle it yet again as a finished product, back to the port, back around the world again, and handle it and truck it yet again, by now any gain is long gone.

Yeah, the distribution route has to be followed in reverse to a certain extent. That’s a cost. Read some more on it, and aluminum is by far the best bang for the buck.


Sometimes touted as a recycling success story, aluminum cans are not only the most frequently recycled product, but also the most profitable and the most energy efficient.

The recycling of aluminum, which is made from bauxite ore, is a closed-loop process, meaning that no new materials are introduced along the way. Aluminum is infinitely recyclable: Cans can be recycled over and over again without degrading. Because of this efficiency, more than two-thirds of all the aluminum ever produced is still in use today [source: Aluminum Now]. So the next time you're feeling lazy and the recycling bin seems so much farther away than the garbage can, you might want to think about the following:

Recycling aluminum prevents the need to mine for ore to create new aluminum. It requires 4 tons of ore to create 1 ton of aluminum.
Recycling aluminum cans takes 95 percent less energy than creating new ones.
The energy it takes to produce one can could produce 20 recycled cans.
The energy saved from recycling one aluminum can could power a 100-watt light bulb for four hours or a television for three hours [sources: Can Manufacturers Institute, Russell].
Not all recyclable products deserve the bragging rights that aluminum does, but some materials come close.

Steel: another recyclable metal made mainly from mined ore, requires 60 percent less energy to recycle than it does to make anew [source: Economist]. Recycling one ton of steel prevents the mining of 2,500 pounds (1,134 kilograms) of iron ore, 1,400 pounds (635 kilograms) of coal and 120 pounds (54 kilograms) of limestone [source: Scottsdale].

Plastic: usually downcycled, meaning it is recycled into something of lesser value like fleece or lumber, but requires 70 percent less energy to recycle than to produce from virgin materials [source: Economist]. And while some people argue that recycling plastic is a lost cause because of its tendency to weaken during reprocessing, manufacturing plastic from new materials requires the messy business of mining for oil and natural gas. Even if plastic can only be recycled once, that's one time that oil and natural gas can be saved.

Glass: recycling glass is 33 percent more energy efficient (and cheaper) than starting fresh and involves no downcycling [source: Economist].
...
https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/recycle-one-thing1.htm